Rather than take up an old thread I figured I'd start a new one to keep things clean. I think it would be a great advantage to have several different options for the path structure of a given component. The first component that came to mind was the Divide surface component, so I put together an example as to how several different structures might work.
http://grasshopper3d.googlegroups.com/web/multiplePathOutputs_divSrf.jpg?hl=en&gsc=8XJ9nAsAAAAf2RWkEQ_BJ3BR0Z1aBFi6 The first option depicted is simply what we have now, so no real need to explain that one. The second option is adding an extra branch per U row or V column (per U column is in the example). This would allow for the data contained by each branch to represent individual rows or columns of points rather than having all of the points generated from a given surface all together. The third option is possibly slightly more complex, but could be very useful and very hard to assemble manually. What the third option does is "strings through" all of the index points, so that all of the U(n)V (n) points for the surfaces could be connected easily. Imagine a curve or polyline going from an given index on surface A, then surface B, all the way to surface N. This means that the data within the top most branches has as many elements as the surfaces within that path. Hopefully this makes sense as to how these different pathing options could actually be structured, and hopefully the usefulness of these options is clear. Best, Damien
